In Steven Greenhouse's article, "Going for the Look, but Risking Discrimination," he states that companies are hiring people based more on their appearance then by their qualifications. This is being considered borderline discrimination. In my opinion, it is not. I believe that companies have the right to hire whom ever they want whether it is someone that is thirty, thin, and thriving with knowledge, or someone young and unexperienced.. All businesses have a certain "image" or "look" that they want to go for, so why is it considered breaking a law to hire someone that represents that? On one hand, this act is thought about as discriminatory. On the other hand, if you are not part of the company, you would have no say in who is hired.
The specific meaning of discrimination is: the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or thing, eps on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Referring to Greenhouse's article, it didn't state that businesses were hiring on those bases. The companies were hiring based on a level of attractiveness. Some may see this as discrimination, but in reality it is not. They are not breaking any laws, so businesses' should continue to hire whoever they want.
My conclusion then, is that I agree with the companies' decision. If I were to run a store, I would hire whoever fit my personal image. Discriminatory or not, that would be my right.
No comments:
Post a Comment